論文名稱：運用情境教學與合作式學習法培養國小學童英聽能力之研究
校名組別：國立成功大學外國語言文學研究所
畢業時間及提要：九十七學年度第二學期碩士論文提要
研究生：藍敏真
指導教授：陳璧清

論文內容摘要：
在台灣，傳統的英語教學是以考試為導向，偏重培養學生的英語讀與寫的能力，以致於很多的學生在多年的英語學習之後仍無法使用英語進行做簡單的溝通對話，也因而喪失了對英語學習的興趣和信心。
中、西方許多教育研究者已證實有效的運用情境教學(Situational Teaching) 或合作學習法(Cooperative Learning) 對於提升學生學習動機及學習成就有相當成效。為了全面提升學生的英語口語能力和學習動機，本研究採融合情境教學與合作學習的教學法 (ST-CL Instruction)，來探究是否此教學法對國小兒童的學習動機和成就的提升有所助益。此外，此教學法是否對於不同成就的學習者有差異性的影響，進而探究學生對此教學法的看法及態度。
本研究涵蓋四個階段：第一個階段進行問卷調查及班級分組；第二個階段為實施情境教學後學生進行小組活動或同儕互助學習並接受聽力評量；第三階段為學生的戲劇表演後接受聽力評量，最後再次進行問卷的後測。研究者為國小英語教師，研究的對象為其服務的台南市一所國民小學48位五年級學生，教材是他們從二年級開始沿用的學校英語課本，其書名為 Happy Rainbow English (Book 7).
此為兼具質化和量化的研究。量的資料來自於分析學生的聽力評量，即五單元共計10次前測及後測的聽力評量成績，測試的目的在探討此教學法是否對學生的聽力與字彙的記憶理解有助益。質化資料來源為學生前、後問卷調查及課堂戲劇演出的觀察評量。問卷的內容在於探討學生對情境教學、小組討論、同儕互助學習及整個學習過程的態度、看法和意見。經過質、量資料研究分析的結果，本研究的主要發現如下：
1. 在接受過此實驗教學法後，學生於每單元的後測都呈現顯著進步，再輔以問卷調查的結果，顯示此實
驗教學法的確對提升學生聽力具有正面成效。學生在單字理解記憶和聽力能力及自信心方面都有明顯
的進步。
2. 低成就學習者經過實驗教學法後，在聽力上比中、高成就者有明顯進步。且在學習的動機、自信心和
對學習的焦慮、恐懼上都有不同程度的正向改變。
3. 在高成就組和低成就組的比較之下，雖然高成就組的進步不若低成就組的明顯，但學習表現亦是成正
面的成長。尤其在語言學習的自發性上尤有明顯的正面影響。
4. 中成就組的表現與其他兩組比較之下，進步程度介於高、低組間，比高成就組好，但又不若低成就組
有明顯大幅的進步。
5. 不論高、中、低成就學生對於情境教學法持正面的態度，認為情境教學使學習更生活化及趣味化。
6. 對於同儕合作學習法，高成就學生表現比較中立或負面的態度，但低成就學生則持最正面及肯定的態
度。
7. 學生對於課堂的戲劇比演，一開始是持比較中立或負面的態度。但是在不斷的練習之後，學生在最後
的問卷調查中皆表達出中立或正面的看法和態度。
根據本研究結果顯示，發現運用情境教學輔以合作學習法的確會增加學生的學習動機及提升其英聽能
力，尤其對於提升低成就學習的學習動機和學習成就效果最為顯著。對於高、中成就學生亦有不同程度
的正面影響。參與本研究之學生最終仍多數表達出對此實驗教學法的支持和認同，而此研究結果顯示ST
-CL 教學法對提升EFL學生的學習動機及英聽能力確有成效。然而，此研究結果亦顯示在實施合作教學法中的同儕教學活動前，對於扮演教學者角色的高成就學生需先進行教學訓練和心理建設，讓他們知道如何能有效的運用一些技巧去幫助他們的學習伙伴解決他們學習上的困難，並讓他們瞭解這樣做對他們也是有必然的價值和好處。此外，給予學生充足的時間去做口語練習和戲劇的排演也是相當重要且必要的。

Abstract
Many students are not able to use the target language to communicate with others, although they have learned English for years. During the past several decades, the traditional examination-guided instruction, which mainly focuses on sentence pattern practice and grammar proficiency, has dominated English teaching in Taiwan and is considered the major factor in hindering students from acquiring English communicative competency. Specifically, there is too much teaching and insufficient learning in traditional language classrooms. Communicative language teaching has gained increasing attention and has been recognized as the main stream in ESL or EFL teaching in recent years (Dornyei, 2001; Savigon, 2002). To holistically cultivate Taiwanese students’ language proficiency, there is a need for implementing the communicative teaching approach in English language curriculum. Based on either ESL or EFL studies, both situational teaching and cooperative learning are confirmed as effective instructional methods. Thus, in order to create an interesting and authentic English learning environment to motivate EFL students to learn, an integrated instructional approach entitled situational teaching with cooperative learning (ST-CL), which imitates real situations by role-playing as well as cooperative peer-assisted learning, may be a relevant approach to be adopted.
The present study is a qualitative-and-quantitative study which included an experimental ST-CL instruction, a series of pre- and post-listening comprehension tests, role-playing activities as well as two instruction questionnaire surveys. One teacher/researcher and 48 fifth graders participated in this study. Under the teacher’s instruction, the students cooperated with each other to achieve the learning goals in situational learning environment. For data collection and analysis, the results of listening comprehension tests and the responses to questionnaires were collected and analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The findings of this study are as follows:
1. The results of the pre- and post-tests indicated that the young EFL learners’ communicative proficiency was significantly promoted through the ST-CL instruction. The analysis of questionnaires also showed that there was a positive shift in their motivation, self-esteem, and attitudes.
2. Comparing the gains among high, medium, and low-achievers, this study found that the lower achievers acquired the most gains. Also their learning anxiety was reduced, motivation increased, and self-esteem was changed toward a more positive direction.
3. High-achievers surpassed the low-achievers in listening skills, though they made less improvement on test scores. However, their learning motivation and autonomy in learning were significantly promoted as the results of tests and questionnaires showed.
4. Medium-achievers’ attitudes, learning motivation and academic achievement were
positively promoted by the experimental instruction. Their progress on the tests was more than high-achievers but less than low-achievers.
5. As for their attitudes toward situational teaching, all the students were in support of the ST-CT instruction because it made learning meaningful, more fun, and helpful for interpersonal relationships.
6. High-achievers initially showed more negative attitudes toward the ST-CL instruction while low-achievers held the most positive ones. However, their attitudes gradually changed when they found the learning strategies, role-playing and peer-assisted learning, facilitated their learning.
7. Both high and low-achievers initially showed more neutral and negative attitudes
toward role-playing because they had some anxiety to use the language in public. Fortunately, cooperative learning mode gradually reduced this negative impact on their learning and thus changed their attitudes toward role-playing.
Overall, the findings indicated the ST-CL instruction exerted a positive influence on young EFL learners’ learning motivation and listening comprehension, especially on the students with low motivation and low language proficiency. For high-achievers, their improvement was not on test performance, but on the ability of reconstructing the unity and correctness of knowledge and becoming more autonomous learners. As to medium achievers, they made steady progress on tests and also learned with more motivation while getting more involved in the ST-CL instruction. That is to say, all the participants generally showed their support for the implementation of the ST-CL instruction. Such results offer a strong support to the advantageous effects of integrating ST with CL in EFL classrooms when there is the need to promote young EFL learners’ motivation and to improve their communicative competence. However, the findings also revealed something worthy of notice when doing peer-assisted learning. The tutors need to receive some training in order to know how to effectively help their tutees. The tutors needed to be told about what advantages they would have for being tutors so as to get rid of the negative feelings of being responsible for others’ learning. Also, giving the students sufficient time to do oral practice is essential to achieve a successful and positive result.

RFERENCES
English References
Anderson, R. H., & Pavan, B. N. (1992). Non-gradedness: Helping it to happen. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing Company, Inc.
Ashman, A. F. (2003). Peer mediation learning needs. In R. M. Gillies & A. F. Ashman (Eds.), Cooperative learning: The social and intellectual outcomes of learning in groups. (pp. 88-102). London: Routledge Falme.
Ashman, A. F., & Gillies, R. M. (2003). Cooperative learning: The social and intellectual outcomes of learning in groups. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Athiemoolan, L. (2006). The role of drama-in-education in the English second language classroom. 37th Annual ELTAI Conference, Ethiraj College.
Bakar, N. A. (2007). English language activities in computer-based learning environment: A case study in ESL Malaysian classroom. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 7(1), 33-49.
Bakar, Z. A., & Singh, D. (2007). Wireless implementation of a mobile learning environment based on students expectations. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 1(2), 198-215.
Barkley, E. F., Gross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2005). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Battistich, V. (2003). Effects of a school-based program to enhance prosaically development on children’s peer relations and social adjustment. Journal of Research in Character Education, 1(1), 1-16.
Battistich, V., & Watson, M. (2003). Development in preschool & early grades. In R. Gillies, & A. Ashman (Eds.). Cooperative learning (pp. 19-35). London: Routledge Falmer.
Bloom, B. (1971). Learning for mastery. In B. S. Bloom, J. T. Hastings, & G. F. Madans (Eds.), Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning ( 4th ed.). New York, NY: McGran-Hill.
Bloom, B. (1976). Human chararctristics and school learning. New York, NY: McGran-Hill.
Bouvet, E., & Strambi, A. (2003). Flexibility and interaction at a distance: A mixed-mode environment for language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 81-102.
Bransford, J. D., Sherwood, R. D., Hasselbring, T. S., Kinzer, C. K., & Williams, S. M. (1990). Anchored instruction: Why we need it and how technology can help. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds.). Cognition, education and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology (pp. 115-141). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bransford, J. D., Vye, N., Kinzer, C., & Risko, V. (1990). Teaching thinking and content knowledge: Toward an integrated approach. In B. F. Jones & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction (pp. 381-413). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brooks, T. B., & Khandker, A. W. (2002). A cooperative learning lab: Does the form matter? Contemporary Economic Policy, 20(3), 330-338.
Brophy, J. (1998). Motivating students to learn. New York: McGran-Hill.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York: Prentice Hall.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-41.
Brown, K. S., & Martin, A. G. (1989). Student achievement in multigrade and single grade classes. Education Canada, 29(2), 10-13.
Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bui, T. X., Sankaran, S. R., & Sankaran, D. (2000). Effect of student attitude to course format on language performance: An empirical study in web vs. lecture instruction. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27(1), 66-73.
Burton, R. R., Brown, J. S., & Fischer, G. (1984). Skiing as a model of instruction. In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 139-150). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cheung, S. H. (2004). Peer-tutoring in pure mathematics subject. Hong Kong Teachers’ Centre Journal, 3, 116-127.
Chinn, C. A., Jinks, T. S., & O’Donnell, A. M. (2000). The structure of discourse in collaborative learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 69(1), 77-97.
Chinnery, G. M. (2006). Going to the MALL: Mobile assisted language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 10(1), 9-16.
Chiou, G. F. (1992). Situated learning, metaphors and computer-based learning environments. Educational Technology, 32(8), 7-11.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19(6), 2-10.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993a). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33(3), 52-70.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993b). Designing learning environments that support thinking: The Jasper Series as a case study. In T. M. Duffy, J. Lowyck, & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning (pp. 9-36). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993c). Toward integrated curricula: Possibilities from anchored instruction. In M. Rabinowitz (Ed.), Cognitive science foundations of instruction (pp. 33-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cohen, R., Boud, D., & Sampson, J. (2001). Dealing with problems encountered in assessment of peer learning. In N. Falchikov (Ed.), Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education (pp. 248-253). New York: RoultedgeFalmer.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
Cook, V. (2001) Ssecond language learning and language teaching. New York: Hodder Arnold.
Cooper, J., Prescott, S., Cook, L., Smith, L., Mueck, R., & Cuseo, J. (1990). Cooperative learning and college instruction: Effective use of student learning teams. Long Beach, CA: California State University Foundation.
Curtain, H., & Dahlberg, C. A. (2004). Languages and children: Making the match, Grades K-8 (3rd ed.). New York: Longman.
D’Cruz, J. Z., Hussin, S., & Maarof, N. (2000). Sustaining an interest in learning English and increasing the motivation to learn English: An enrichment program. The Proceedings of the 3rd Malaysia International Conference for English Language Teaching (pp. 15-17). Malaysia: The Millennium MICELT 2000.
Djiwandono, P. (2006). Cooperative listening as a means to promote strategic listening comprehension. English Teaching Forum, 44(3), 32-34.
Dodson, S. L. (2000). Learning language through drama. Texas Papers in Foreign Language Education, 5(1), 129-141.
Dornyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualizing motivation in foreign language classroom. Language Teaching, 31(3), 117-135.
Eames, F. H. (1989). A study of the effectiveness of instruction in multi-age grading vs. traditional single-grade organization on the reading achievement of fourth graders. Educational Research, 66(3), 323-340.
Ehrman, M. E., Krashen, S. D., Herzog, M., & Terrell, T. D. (1984). A theoretical basis for teaching the receptive skills. Foreign Language Annals, 17(4), 261-275.
Falchikov, N., (2001). Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education. New York: RoultedFalmer.
Feyren, C. (1997). The power of listening ability: An overlooked dimension in language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 75, 174-180.
Finocchiaro, M. (1977). Role-playing in the language classroom. Zielsprache English, 3, 1-6.
Finocchiaro, M. (1982). Motivation: Its crucial role in language learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 233 3.85)
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Kazdan, S., Karns, K., Calhoon, M. B., Hamlett, C. L., & Hewlett, S. (2000). Effects of workgroup structure and size on student productivity during collaborative work on complex tasks. The Elementary School Journal, 100(3), 183-212.
Furness, P. (1976). Role-play in the elementary school: A handbook for teachers. New York, NY: Hart Publishing Company, Inc.
Gange, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wagger, W. (1988). Principles of instructional design (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, Inc.
Garrison, J. W., & Shargel, E. I. (1986). Dewey and Husserl: A surprising convergence of themes. Educational Theory, 38, 239-247.
Garton, A. F., & Pratt, C. (2001). Peer-assistance in children’s problem solving. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 19, 307-318.
Gersten, R., & Baker, S. (2000). What we know about effective instructional practices for English-language learners. Exceptional Children, 66, 454-470.
Gillies. R. M. (2003). Structuring cooperative group work in class-rooms. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 35-49.
Griffin, M. M. (1995). You can’t get there from here: Situated learning, transfer and map skills. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 65-87.
Guo, T. Z. (2007). The effects of cooperative learning on elementary school students in English learning: An action research. Unpublished master’s thesis, Southern Taiwan University of Technology, Taiwan.
Gutierrez, R., & Slavin, R. E. (1992). Achievement effects of the non-graded elementary school: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 62(4), 333-376.
Halliday, M. A. K., McIntosh, A., & Strevens, P. (1964). The linguistic sciences and language teaching. London: Longman.
Hsu, H. (2006). The effects of motivation on Taiwanese college students’ English listening comprehension. Dissertation Abstracts International, UMI No. 3216198.
Huang, I. Y. (2008). Role play for ESL/EFL children in the English classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, XIV(2). Retrieved from
http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Huang-RolePlay.html
Huang, K.-W., & Tang H.-H. (2007). Applying cooperative learning in the EFL elementary context: development and effect: The example of the sixth graders of Pingtung. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Pingtung University, Taiwan.
Hunter, M. (1982). Mastery teaching: Increasing instructional effectiveness in elementary secondary school, colleges and universities. EL Segundo, CA: Tip Publishing.
Jarfari, S. M. (2008). Listening comprehension and foreign language classroom anxiety among Iranian EFL learners. Unpublished master’s thesis. Shiraz Azad University, Shiraz.
Jenkins, J. R., & Jenkins, L. M. (1985). Peer-tutoring in elementary and secondary programs. Focus on Expectation Children, 17(6), 1-12.
Jennifer, B., & Julia, K. (2000). Using group role-play to test speaking: Setting up a “wohngemeinschaft”. ERIC Journal, 33(2), 134-137.
Johnson, C. G., James, R, H., Lye, J. N., & McDonald, I. M. (2000). An evaluation of collaborative problem solving for learning economics. Journal of Economic Education, 31, 13-29.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1992). Implementing cooperative learning. Contemporary Education, 63(3), 173-180.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty institutional productivity. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Rept. 4. Washington, D.C.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D., Johnson, R., & Stanne, M. (2000). Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis. Retrieved from http://www.clcrc.com/pages/cl-methods.html.
Johnson, D., Johnson, R., Pierson, W. T., & Lyons, V. (1985). Controversy versus concurrence seeking in multi-grade and single-grade learning groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(9), 835-848.
Jonassen, D., Mayes, T., & McAleese, R. (1993). A manifesto for a constructivist approach to uses of technology in higher education. In T. M. Duffy, J. Lowyck, & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning (pp. 231-247). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Kamii,C. (1985). Young children reinvent arithemetic: Implication of Piaget’s theory. New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.
Kaplan, M. A. (1997). Learning to converse in a foreign language: The reception game. Simulation and Gaming, 28, 149-163.
Katz, L., Evangelou, D., & Hartman, J. (1990). The case for mixed-age grouping in early education. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Kern, R., & Warschauer, M. (2000). Theory and practice of network-based language teaching. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 1-19). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Krish, P. (2001). A role-play activity with distance learners in an English language classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, 7 (7). Retrieved from
http://iteslj.org/Article/Krish-RolePlay.html
Kumpulainen, K., & Kartinen, S. (2003). The interpersonal dynamics of collaborative reasoning in peer interactive dyads. Journal of Experimental Education, 71(4), 333-370.
Ladousse, G. P. (2004). Role play. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, L.-C. (2008). Nature and thematic review of PAL. Fen Chia Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 17, 141-164.
Lee, T.-C. (2006). The effects of cooperative learning instruction on elementary school students’ motivation, self-efficacy, and oral performance in learning English. Unpublished master’s thesis, Nationl Changhua University of Education, Taiwan.
Lillian, M. F., & Alison, F. G. (2005). The effect of peer-collaboration on children’s problem-solving ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 157-169.
Lin, Y.-L. (2007). A research on peer and teacher review in contextualized grammar instruction to young EFL learners. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.
Lindholm, J. A., Astin, A. W., Sax, L. J., & Korn, W. S. (2001). The American college teacher: National norms for the 2001-2002 HERI faculty survey. Los Angels, CA: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA.
Maley, A., & Duff, A. (1982). Drama techniques in language learning. Cambridge University Press.
Maley, A., & Duff, A. (1982). From text to context: Spontaneous group role playing. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 318 262)
Mamdouh, E.N. (2000). Drama as a teaching in the second language classroom. Dalog on Language Instruction, 4(2), 41-48.
Mayer, R.(1984). “Listen my children, and you shall hear…” Foreign Language Annals, 17, 343-344.
McLellan, H. (1994). Situated learning: Continuing the conversation. Educational Technology, 34(10), 7-8.
Meijnen, G. W., & Guldemond, H. (2002). Grouping in primary schools and reference process. Educational Research and Evaluation, 8(3), 229-248.
Miller, B. A. (1989). The multi-grade classroom: A resource handbook for small, rural schools. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Miller, L. J., Kolher, F. W., Ezell, H., Hoel, K., & Strain, P. S. (1993). Winning with peer-tutoring: A teacher’s guide. Preventing School Failure, 37(3), 14-18.
Morley, J. (2001). Aural comprehension instruction: Principles and practices. In MCelce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 69-85). Boston, MA: Heenle & Heinle Publishers.
Nath, L. R., & Ross, S. M. (2001). The influence of a peer-tutoring training model for implementing cooperative groupings with elementary students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(2), 41-56.
Ngeow, K. Y. (1998). Motivation and transfer in language learning. The Internet TESL Journal.
Retrieved from: http://www.kidsource.com/education/motivation.lang.learn.html
Nobuko, O. (2004). Listening comprehension research: A brief review of the past thirty years. Dialogue, 3, 53-66.
Norros-Holt, J. (2001). Motivation as a contributing factor in second language acquisition. The Internet TESL Journal. Retrieved from
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Norris-Motivation.html
Nurrenbern, S. (1995). Experiences in cooperative learning: A collection for chemistry teachers (Institute for Chemical Education). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Board of Regents.
Ogden, L. (2000). Collaborative tasks, collaborative children: An analysis of reciprocity during peer interaction at key stage 1. British Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 211-226.
Norton, R., & Redmond, M. L. (2006). Instructional strategies that promote listening comprehension in secondary French class. Winston-Salem, NC: Wake Forest Universtiy. (Document Reproduction Service ERIC No. 494888)
Richards, J. C., & Theodore, S. R. (1988). Approaches and methods in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
River, W. (1966). Listening comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 50, 196-204.
Rodger, T. R. (2001). Language teaching methodology. Digest: Issue Paper. Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/resources/Digest/rodgers.html
Rost, M. (2005). L2 Listening. In E. Hinkel (Ed.). Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 503-527). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Salyer B. K., & Thyfault, A. (2003). Developing situational learning events: A practical merger of real life events with content instruction. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the American Council of Rural Special Education, (pp. 106-111).
Samaha, N. V., & Delisi, R. (2000). Peer coloration on a nonverbal reasoning task by urban minority students. Journal of Experimental Education, 69(1), 5-14.
Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., & Biezuner, S. (2000). Two wrongs may make a right: If they argue together! Cognition and Instruction, 18(4), 491-494.
Shachar, H. (2003). Who gains what from cooperative learning: An overview of eight studies. In R. Gillies & A. Ashman (Eds.), Cooperative learning: The social and intellectual outcomes of learning in groups (pp. 103-118). London, UK: Routledg Falmer.
Siskin, J. H., & Spinelli, E. (1987). Achieving communicative competence through gambits and routines. Foreign Language Annual, 20(5), 393-40.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Slavin, R. E. (1998). Cooperative learning and student achievement. Education Leadership, 48(5), 71-82.
Smith, M. (2001). Examples of learning in development. Rabbani Trust Sed Seminar & Conference. Retrieved from http://www.rabbanitrust.org/ papers2001/
examples_of_learning_in_development.doc.
Snyman, R., & Dec Kock, M. D. (1991). Problem solving and creative thinking in structured second language teaching. Journal of Creative Behavior, 25(3), 228-240.
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Steven, Y. (2007). Does cooperative learning improve student learning outcomes? Journal of Economic Education, 38(3), 259-277.
Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Thanasoulas, D. (2000). What is learner autonomy and how can it be fostered? The Internet TESL Journal, 6(11). Retrieved from
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Thanasoulas-Autonomy.html
Tod, H. (2003). The effect of group discussion on the acceptance of low-achieving
peers who display variable academic effort. Northern Illinois University, USA.
Retrieved from http://211.20.11.205:8080/edissstat/ customPDFList? CuNO
=0611& NO=0611&NO=1104
Underwood, J., Underwood, G., & Wood, D. (2000). When does gender matter? Interaction during computer-based problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 10(5), 447-462.
Verriour, P. (1986). This issue: Educating through drama. Theory into Practice, 24(3), 151-157.
Warschauer, M. (2000). Online learning in second language classroom: An Thnographic study. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern. (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concept and practice (pp. 41-58). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wu, J.-Y. (2004). The correlation between language anxiety and English speaking proficiency for the 3rd-graders and the 6th-graders in an elementary school. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.
Ya, Y.-C., (2004). Students’ perceptions of cooperative learning methods in one senior high school EFL classroom in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, Ming Chuan University, Taiwan.
Young, D. J. (1991). Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment: What does language anxiety research. Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 426-439.
Young, M. F. (1993). Instructional design for situated learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(1), 43-58.
Young, M. F. (1995). Assessment of situated learning using computer environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4(1), 89-96.

Chinese References
李瑩香 (2004)。同儕教學對國中英語科低成就學生影響之個案研究。台中市:台中市立雙十國中。
施玉惠 (1999)。九年一貫「 英語」課程簡介 語文領域英語。台北市: 翰林文教雜誌版。
陳品華 (1997)。從認知觀點談情境與教學。教育資料與研究，17，53-59。
陳碩琳 (2003)。目標導向、學習滿意度與學習績效關係之研究以國立空中大學高雄指導中心為例。未出版碩士論文，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所，高雄市。